• Home
  • All Blog Posts
  • Behavioral Science
  • White Papers
  • Toolbox
  • Archives
Discover the behavioral science principles that relate to fundraising.
  • Agency
  • Anchoring
  • Context effect
  • Commitment & consistency
  • Default Bias
  • Desire for Completion
  • Exceptional Expense
  • Goal Proximity
  • Hassle Free
  • Hyperbolic Discounting (present bias)
  • Identifiable Victim Effect
  • Identity
  • Loss aversion
  • Mental Accounting
  • Overhead Aversion
  • Perceived Impact
  • Perceived Control
  • Social Proof
  • Time-Ask Effect
  • Urgency
  • Voice of authority
Discover How to Tackle 8 Fundraising Challenges.
  • Acquisition
  • Average gift
  • Consent to marketing
  • Lapsed reactivation
  • Regular gift conversion
  • Donor Retention
  • Upgrade
  • 2nd gift conversion

30th September & 1st October 2019

Access the talks

 

So, what is behavioral science?

Most of our decisions including the decision to donate time or money aren’t always the result of careful deliberation. There are numerous factors, conscious and subconscious, that affect them like what other people are doing or the context we’re in. Behavioral science tries to explain why people do what they do and how we could increase desired behaviors or eliminate problematic ones.

Don’t try it at home

Behavioral science is a hot topic in fundraising right now. Yet its popularization could also be its downfall. It is often seen as panacea, a magic bullet, that is very easy to use on your own. And when it doesn’t work it’s easily dismissed as a cheap trick.

In reality, behavioral science is a complex science whose application requires subject matter expertise. Reading a few popular books on the topic might help you understand the theory, but it doesn’t provide the necessary training on how to practice it.

Just as you wouldn’t want a friend to perform an operation after reading a couple of textbooks, you shouldn’t apply behavioural science without the help of an expert. That’s why DonorVoice wants to help.

Popular books recite numerous biases and principles, each tested in a specific field. Just because a nudge worked in one field, there’s no guarantee it’ll work in another, in this case fundraising. Blind application of nudges from different areas can have catastrophic results.

Testing is imperative when it comes to behavioral science. And to do it you need a deep understanding of how the effectiveness of even well-known biases might change in different contexts, audiences, or channels as well as expertise on experimental design and analyses.

Meet the DonorVoice Nudge Unit and Kiki, DonorVoice’s resident Behavioral Scientist

Kiki combines subject matter expertise with years of fundraising practice.

With a PhD in cognitive psychology, she’s been helping charities apply behavioral science and improve their fundraising for the last 6 years. Her deep knowledge of the numerous behavioral biases and principles can only be matched by her understanding of whether and how these insights might be relevant to fundraising. Through testing, she’s put many effects to the test to see if they can also be effectively applied to increase giving behavior.

Kiki also created the first-ever nudge unit for our sector, the DonorVoice Nudge Unit; the most qualified team to help you apply behavioral insights to your fundraising challenges. The academics you see on the right are all subject matter experts, who are devoting themselves to partnering with you to get beyond ‘best’ practice to better results.

Our goal is to help you create a culture of curiosity in your organisation that is consistently looking to improve and apply these insights to all aspects of your fundraising. That’s why, in addition to our services, we also offer for free to our subscribers:

Behavioral principles that relate to fundraising
From the drop down menu above, our subscribers can explore some of the key biases that could increase giving. Each principle includes a brief definition, an application example and a fundraising opportunity.

How to tackle 8 fundraising challenges with behavioral science.
From the second drop down menu, our subscribers can access suggested solutions to a fundraising challenge they might be facing.

How can we help?

Behavioral science might not be a silver bullet, but applied consistently and rigorously it can lead to big improvements in your fundraising results. Have a look at our services and ask for a free call back to discover how behavioral science could and should be applied to help you achieve your fundraising goals.

Meet the Scientists

  • Dr. Kiki Koutmeridou
  • Dr Stephan Dickert
  • Peter Ayton
  • Elizabeth Keenan
  • Hengchen Dai
  • Enrico Rubaltelli
  • David Reinstein
  • Ayelet Gneezy

Ask A Behavioral Scientist

    Behavioral Science Q & A

    Q: What are the types of survey questions I could ask that would reveal donor identity?

    The questions depend on the cause. Different identities will explain giving to a health charity (connection to disease), different to a conservationist charity (environmentalist) and different to a university (alumnus/a). Even for the same cause, there may be various identities that can explain giving. For example, someone might give to a cancer charity because they’re […]

    Read Full Answer

    Q: Is there research showing the effectiveness of publicly stating a goal for a fundraising campaign or event? We often hear arguments both for and against from fundraisers we work with. On the one hand, some believe a goal creates excitement and interest in collectively working (donating) to reach that goal. On the other, some will say once the goal is reached, (potential) donors will think their dollars aren’t needed and not give. Is the key in the messaging (there is always more to be done) more so than the statement of the goal itself?

    There’s evidence (see this paper and this one) that people are more motivated to give when there’s a target, provided we’re close at reaching it. Once a certain level has been exceeded e.g. 75%-80%, donations start pouring in. It’s an indirect measure of social proof – it means many people gave – but also of […]

    Read Full Answer

    Q: Question about premiums. I read Kiki’s article from May 8 about rewards, and my primary take-away is that I should thank my donors verbally with sincere appreciation and gratitude. And make sure they see the impact of their gifts. But my organization has been giving a premium to donors of $1,000 and up for quite a few years. I want to stop the practice because I think it’s expensive and shallow. But the founders feel strongly about it, and a few of their good friends that are in that group realllly love the cookies we send them. How can I convince the founders that we can do something different that is more meaningful, and transition away from this meaningless gift in a gentle way?

    First of all, it makes a difference if a premium is contingent to the donation or not. Sending an item after a donation has been made without having mentioned it to the supporters beforehand is different to telling them they’ll receive an item if they make a donation. The first is a thank-you gift, which, […]

    Read Full Answer

    Q: Is there any evidence that referring to donors as “members” versus “friends” or even just “donors” makes a difference? I’m not talking about benefits or voting rights, just the word itself. Does it feel unnecessarily exclusive, when everyone else is focusing on inclusivity?

    Before we look at the differences between “donor” and “member”, let’s take a step back. There’s evidence that using nouns e.g. “helper” instead of verbs e.g. “help” leads to an increase of the behaviour described by the noun, in this case helping behaviour. The theory behind this is that nouns signal a fixed identity or […]

    Read Full Answer

    Q: I was wondering about the order of telling a story to a potential new funder. It seems to me (though happy to be corrected!) the key elements are broadly 1) introducing your charity 2) explaining the need 3) explaining your response to that need 4) providing a personal story 5) making a financial ask. These elements vary between the factual, emotional, negative (need) and positive (response) and so is there a natural order that will most likely lead to a positive outcome? Additionally would this order differ for different audiences eg grant giving foundations, corporate supporters, individuals? Thanks again

    I wish I had a simple answer and a set-in-stone order for all fundraising pitches. Unfortunately, there are different factors at play that should determine not just the order but also the content itself. You ask if a different order needs to be used for foundations, corporate and individual supporters. In my view, a different […]

    Read Full Answer

    Q: I work for a land conservation organization. One of our biggest hurdles is that many people believe that the 2% transfer tax they paid when buying their home goes to our organization instead of to the County. Our messaging (on basically everything) is: “The Peconic Land Trust does not collect or distribute funds from the 2% real estate transfer tax. . .” I read somewhere that having that negative association actually perpetuates the misconception rather than eliminating it. Can you point me towards that research? I’m trying to convince my marketing people that we need to tell people where our funding comes from, instead of telling them where it doesn’t come from.

    It’s true that in some cases, efforts to correct a misconception result in the opposite e.g. this study showing how trying to correct unsubstantiated beliefs about politics had a “backfire effect” in some instances: https://www.dartmouth.edu/~nyhan/nyhan-reifler.pdf. So it might not always happen and it might not happen to everyone but the risk is there. The other […]

    Read Full Answer



      • © Copyright 2005 - 2021, The Agitator. All Rights Reserved.
      • About Us
      • Privacy Policy
      • Sitemap
      • RSS Feed
      • We welcome your feedback!